Ernst & Young regularly carries out large-scale surveys of corporate employees across a range of countries on issues such as ethics and corruption in the workplace.

In the latest Global Fraud Survey (PDF), which took place at the end of 2016, 88% of Ukrainian employees thought that bribery and corrupt practices are widespread in business in this country.

Incidentally, this figure was 85% in the 2013 survey, the last year of “normalcy” before the Maidan. It was also at 80% in 2015. In short, overthrow of the “kleptocratic” Yanukovych made no difference to these figures. Zilch.

Now to be sure, the E&Y survey is more a measure of corruption perceptions than a measure of corruption itself, and the two are not necessarily the same. Still, there is definitely a correlation – according to Transparency International’s direct surveys of bribery incidence, the Ukraine consistently competes with Moldova for the status of Europe’s most corrupt nation, while the country with the lowest (best) ranking on the E&Y survey, Denmark, had 0% of respondents saying they had to pay a bribe in the past year when they were queried about it.

Overall, this is just one more piece of evidence to the effect that the Maidan has failed to solve the main problem that it set for itself.

In other news, Central Bank head Valeria Gontareva has offered up her resignation (after having disappeared from the limelight several weeks ago). In her three years of office under Poroshenko, she and her relatives appear to have done well for thmselves, like many bureaucrats throughout the post-Soviet world. Still, but many accounts, she has done a pretty good job; some 40% of financial institutions have been closed, including many offshoring funnels and pocket banks, while most of the rest have been forced to clarify their ownership structures. But with mounting uncertainties over the future of IMF credits piling up and an emerging crisis over fraud at Kolomoysky’s Privatbank before its nationalization, I suppose now is as good a time as any to part ways.

Speaking of the Ukraine, Trump’s defection to the neocon side is probably a negative development for it. Putin has only acted against the Ukraine when Russian interests were attacked there. In other words, he reacted. The victory of the Maidan put the naval base in Sevastopol in danger. Later on the junta’s heavy shelling of Donetsk started the campaign in which Kiev lost Debaltsevo.

If a Trump appointee urges the junta to attack again, Mariupol or the Slavyansk-Kramatorsk area could be next.

These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.

Speaking of the Ukraine, Trump's defection to the neocon side is probably a negative development for it. Putin has only acted against the Ukraine when Russian interests were attacked there. In other words, he reacted. The victory of the Maidan put the naval base in Sevastopol in danger. Later on the junta's heavy shelling of Donetsk started the campaign in which Kiev lost Debaltsevo.

If a Trump appointee urges the junta to attack again, Mariupol or the Slavyansk-Kramatorsk area could be next.

‘Overall, this is just one more piece of evidence to the effect that the Maidan has failed to solve the main problem that it set for itself.’

You’re correct with your assessment here, and I strongly suspect that this mid-term report card does not bid well at all for Poroshenko and his ability to return for a second term (although I was surprised when Yanukovych, one of the crookedest politicians, won by a very narrow margin). The mood in Ukraine isn’t quite as festive as the enclosed clip indicates, but does indicate that Ukrainians are fed up with corruption that is rampant and slow to disappear. Being #16 out of 193 (not 41, as the graph shows) is nothing that Russians should feel complacent about either.

although I was surprised when Yanukovych, one of the crookedest politicians, won by a very narrow margin

This wasn't surprising, given that Ukraine was about evenly divided, with the "Orange" side only having about a 1%-2% natural advantage. That wasn't enough to overcome the global 2009 crisis that hit Ukraine (and therefore its incumbent rulers) hard, and the intra-Orange infighting during which Yushchenko was basically working to get Yanukovich elected. Also, a lot of Ukrainians falsely assumed that Ukraine had a functioning system of checks and balances and that therefore Yanukovich wouldn't have all that much power if he won. Such people tended to vote "against all" or didn't vote, and later wished they had voted against Yanukovich.

Germany is fantastically corrupt, to the core. If you doubt this, just look up on your favorite search engine some of the well known scandals surrounding, inter alia, VW, Siemens, Deutsche Bank, and Daimler. The question above as to why is a good one.

'Overall, this is just one more piece of evidence to the effect that the Maidan has failed to solve the main problem that it set for itself.'

You're correct with your assessment here, and I strongly suspect that this mid-term report card does not bid well at all for Poroshenko and his ability to return for a second term (although I was surprised when Yanukovych, one of the crookedest politicians, won by a very narrow margin). The mood in Ukraine isn't quite as festive as the enclosed clip indicates, but does indicate that Ukrainians are fed up with corruption that is rampant and slow to disappear. Being #16 out of 193 (not 41, as the graph shows) is nothing that Russians should feel complacent about either.

https://youtu.be/eQkvydzNFO8

although I was surprised when Yanukovych, one of the crookedest politicians, won by a very narrow margin

This wasn’t surprising, given that Ukraine was about evenly divided, with the “Orange” side only having about a 1%-2% natural advantage. That wasn’t enough to overcome the global 2009 crisis that hit Ukraine (and therefore its incumbent rulers) hard, and the intra-Orange infighting during which Yushchenko was basically working to get Yanukovich elected. Also, a lot of Ukrainians falsely assumed that Ukraine had a functioning system of checks and balances and that therefore Yanukovich wouldn’t have all that much power if he won. Such people tended to vote “against all” or didn’t vote, and later wished they had voted against Yanukovich.

I don't deny the problems that people in LDNR are facing, but those mostly stem from Ukrainian agression directed against them. Now, losing Kharkov will do some serious damage to Ukraine's capacity to fight a war and the rump Banderite entity will be less of a military threat.

I'd rather Kharkiv and its people be spared Donbas' fate. I guess you disagree.

I don’t deny the problems that people in LDNR are facing, but those mostly stem from Ukrainian agression directed against them. Now, losing Kharkov will do some serious damage to Ukraine’s capacity to fight a war and the rump Banderite entity will be less of a military threat.

I'm curious, just who exactly within the current power verticle in Ukraine is a 'Banderite'? Poroshenko, Grossman, or perhaps Lutsenko? Or is the usage of the descriptor 'Banderite ' just another stupid meme that really has no basis in fact, and is your catchall phrase to identify any Ukrainian who doesn't feel that he's part of some sort of subset of the Russian nation (in other words, the vast majority of Ukrainians)?

So for you, 5,000 dead civilians, billions in damage, 1 million plus displaced people (the price paid by the Donbas people for the Russian adventurism) is "worth it" so that local and foreign Russian "Rambos" supported by the Russian government can do their thing, and so that the Ukrainian state has a damaged military (and economic) capacity. Your humanitarianism towards people you consider to be "Novorussians" is awe-inspiring.

I don't deny the problems that people in LDNR are facing, but those mostly stem from Ukrainian agression directed against them. Now, losing Kharkov will do some serious damage to Ukraine's capacity to fight a war and the rump Banderite entity will be less of a military threat.

‘the rump Banderite entity’

I’m curious, just who exactly within the current power verticle in Ukraine is a ‘Banderite’? Poroshenko, Grossman, or perhaps Lutsenko? Or is the usage of the descriptor ‘Banderite ‘ just another stupid meme that really has no basis in fact, and is your catchall phrase to identify any Ukrainian who doesn’t feel that he’s part of some sort of subset of the Russian nation (in other words, the vast majority of Ukrainians)?

I don't have a dog in this fight, but it seems to me that there is no shortage of right-wing radicals at the second tier of the Ukrainian government, and that the top tier has to give them some of what they want. Andriy Parubiy, for example, was founder with Oleh Tyahnybok of the Social-National Party of Ukraine before trying to put on a more mainstream face. His current party affiliation is People's Front (president: Yatsenyuk), which has a military council representing all of the major right-wing militias (Azov, Aidar, and so on). In 2014, People's Front won 82 seats in parliament, while Petro Poroshenko Bloc won 132 (the two largest representations). So Poroshenko has to give them at least some of what they want.

After Yatsenuk got kicked out of the Prime Minister's seat and the speaker Groysman was promoted to Prime Minister, Parubiy took over as speaker.

All this information is easy to find, on Wikipedia for instance.

An aside: there is no shortage of neo-Nazis in Russia (though fortunately not in the government). How do Ukrainian and Russian neo-Nazis view each other?

the ratings make no sense. what does ”corrupt practices happen widely in business” even mean? in slovakia we have a growing problem of idealistic young know-it-all liberals who see corruption everywhere but can’t even define it. the claim that we are above nigeria, kenya or the czechs is laughable

Romania doing better than Austria? Poland better than Germany? That survey is trash. Even if the general contours are what you’d expect, you don’t need E&Y to tell you that the Nordics are largely free from corruption but Greece and India are not.

As a sidenote, AK, are you going to do a write-up on how your experiences in Moscow have been so far? I’d be curious to see the perspective from someone who is well-travelled as you.

I'm curious, just who exactly within the current power verticle in Ukraine is a 'Banderite'? Poroshenko, Grossman, or perhaps Lutsenko? Or is the usage of the descriptor 'Banderite ' just another stupid meme that really has no basis in fact, and is your catchall phrase to identify any Ukrainian who doesn't feel that he's part of some sort of subset of the Russian nation (in other words, the vast majority of Ukrainians)?

I don’t have a dog in this fight, but it seems to me that there is no shortage of right-wing radicals at the second tier of the Ukrainian government, and that the top tier has to give them some of what they want. Andriy Parubiy, for example, was founder with Oleh Tyahnybok of the Social-National Party of Ukraine before trying to put on a more mainstream face. His current party affiliation is People’s Front (president: Yatsenyuk), which has a military council representing all of the major right-wing militias (Azov, Aidar, and so on). In 2014, People’s Front won 82 seats in parliament, while Petro Poroshenko Bloc won 132 (the two largest representations). So Poroshenko has to give them at least some of what they want.

After Yatsenuk got kicked out of the Prime Minister’s seat and the speaker Groysman was promoted to Prime Minister, Parubiy took over as speaker.

All this information is easy to find, on Wikipedia for instance.

An aside: there is no shortage of neo-Nazis in Russia (though fortunately not in the government). How do Ukrainian and Russian neo-Nazis view each other?

I don’t have a dog in this fight, but it seems to me that there is no shortage of right-wing radicals at the second tier of the Ukrainian government, and that the top tier has to give them some of what they want.

You are correct. But having some right-wing nationalists in the second tier (it is still not dominated by them) and giving them some of what they want is not does not equal a "Banderist government." The Communist Party, who venerate Stalin, were Yanukovich's coalition partners in the parliament (though they were only given one ministerial post during his rule), yet it is not referred to as the "Stalinist government."

Andriy Parubiy, for example, was founder with Oleh Tyahnybok of the Social-National Party of Ukraine before trying to put on a more mainstream face.

This shift from right-wing extremism to respectable far right is comparable to the mainstreaming of France's National Front or Austria's Freedom Party. Before the former parties decided that Russia was a much more useful ally, they had friendly relations with Ukraine's Svoboda party, btw.

His current party affiliation is People’s Front (president: Yatsenyuk), which has a military council representing all of the major right-wing militias (Azov, Aidar, and so on). In 2014, People’s Front won 82 seats in parliament,

Although Parubiy joined Yatseniuk's party, it is not his party but follows its own program. The People's Front is not a far right party. It's like if Le Pen joined the French Conservatives and as a Conservative was given an important post.

An aside: there is no shortage of neo-Nazis in Russia (though fortunately not in the government). How do Ukrainian and Russian neo-Nazis view each other?

Some hate each other and kill each other in Donbas. Other Russian neo-Nazis hate Putin more than they do the Ukrainians, and fight on Ukraine's side.

Here's a pro-Russian neo-Nazi psychopath who led the Rusich group, which came to Ukraine in order to kill Ukrainians:

(warning - there is a graphic picture in there of him beheading a puppy):

A note: I did say that this is much more a measure of corruption perceptions, than corruption as such.

There is however a good correlation between the two – Denmark is highest on this list, and Ukraine is lowest (just as it is second-to-last on the incidence of bribery rating measured by Transparency international).

And perceptions are important too, even when inaccurate. They very much influence how people act. So what this means for Ukraine is that even if actual corruption is not as bad as people perceive it to be, they feel very oppressed and probably hopeless.

A note: I did say that this is much more a measure of corruption perceptions, than corruption as such.

There is however a good correlation between the two - Denmark is highest on this list, and Ukraine is lowest (just as it is second-to-last on the incidence of bribery rating measured by Transparency international).

And perceptions are important too, even when inaccurate. They very much influence how people act. So what this means for Ukraine is that even if actual corruption is not as bad as people perceive it to be, they feel very oppressed and probably hopeless.

A note: I did say that this is much more a measure of corruption perceptions, than corruption as such.

There is however a good correlation between the two - Denmark is highest on this list, and Ukraine is lowest (just as it is second-to-last on the incidence of bribery rating measured by Transparency international).

maybe they have too high demands of themselves. and different things count as corruption across cultures
“what’s good for the Russian…”
but seriously, 43%…

Germans like to beat themselves up. At the same time, Germany is not the orderly, efficient, and just society that I once imagined. I could go on about that, but won't. More to the point, I'm familiar with one case of corruption in Germany: a university professor demanding payment from a Ukrainian student for private lessons in order to pass a final examation for the Diplom. The student was fighting back and going through some legal procedures. I mentioned this to a German friend, who was saddened but not surprised and advised that the student stop digging her own grave.

I don't deny the problems that people in LDNR are facing, but those mostly stem from Ukrainian agression directed against them. Now, losing Kharkov will do some serious damage to Ukraine's capacity to fight a war and the rump Banderite entity will be less of a military threat.

I don’t deny the problems that people in LDNR are facing

So for you, 5,000 dead civilians, billions in damage, 1 million plus displaced people (the price paid by the Donbas people for the Russian adventurism) is “worth it” so that local and foreign Russian “Rambos” supported by the Russian government can do their thing, and so that the Ukrainian state has a damaged military (and economic) capacity. Your humanitarianism towards people you consider to be “Novorussians” is awe-inspiring.

You've got it backwards: the real issue is Ukrainian regime, that's hostile to Russia and Russians. It must be declawed so that it's no longer in the position to hurt the Russian people.

The reason why there are refugees from Donbass is because major cities are close to the frontline, and being subjected to daily Ukrainian shelling. In other words the solution to the problem of Ukraine is more intervention, not less intervention.

maybe they have too high demands of themselves. and different things count as corruption across cultures"what's good for the Russian..."but seriously, 43%...

>[Perceptions] very much influence how people act.

so true

Germans like to beat themselves up. At the same time, Germany is not the orderly, efficient, and just society that I once imagined. I could go on about that, but won’t. More to the point, I’m familiar with one case of corruption in Germany: a university professor demanding payment from a Ukrainian student for private lessons in order to pass a final examation for the Diplom. The student was fighting back and going through some legal procedures. I mentioned this to a German friend, who was saddened but not surprised and advised that the student stop digging her own grave.

I don't have a dog in this fight, but it seems to me that there is no shortage of right-wing radicals at the second tier of the Ukrainian government, and that the top tier has to give them some of what they want. Andriy Parubiy, for example, was founder with Oleh Tyahnybok of the Social-National Party of Ukraine before trying to put on a more mainstream face. His current party affiliation is People's Front (president: Yatsenyuk), which has a military council representing all of the major right-wing militias (Azov, Aidar, and so on). In 2014, People's Front won 82 seats in parliament, while Petro Poroshenko Bloc won 132 (the two largest representations). So Poroshenko has to give them at least some of what they want.

After Yatsenuk got kicked out of the Prime Minister's seat and the speaker Groysman was promoted to Prime Minister, Parubiy took over as speaker.

All this information is easy to find, on Wikipedia for instance.

An aside: there is no shortage of neo-Nazis in Russia (though fortunately not in the government). How do Ukrainian and Russian neo-Nazis view each other?

I don’t have a dog in this fight, but it seems to me that there is no shortage of right-wing radicals at the second tier of the Ukrainian government, and that the top tier has to give them some of what they want.

You are correct. But having some right-wing nationalists in the second tier (it is still not dominated by them) and giving them some of what they want is not does not equal a “Banderist government.” The Communist Party, who venerate Stalin, were Yanukovich’s coalition partners in the parliament (though they were only given one ministerial post during his rule), yet it is not referred to as the “Stalinist government.”

Andriy Parubiy, for example, was founder with Oleh Tyahnybok of the Social-National Party of Ukraine before trying to put on a more mainstream face.

This shift from right-wing extremism to respectable far right is comparable to the mainstreaming of France’s National Front or Austria’s Freedom Party. Before the former parties decided that Russia was a much more useful ally, they had friendly relations with Ukraine’s Svoboda party, btw.

His current party affiliation is People’s Front (president: Yatsenyuk), which has a military council representing all of the major right-wing militias (Azov, Aidar, and so on). In 2014, People’s Front won 82 seats in parliament,

Although Parubiy joined Yatseniuk’s party, it is not his party but follows its own program. The People’s Front is not a far right party. It’s like if Le Pen joined the French Conservatives and as a Conservative was given an important post.

An aside: there is no shortage of neo-Nazis in Russia (though fortunately not in the government). How do Ukrainian and Russian neo-Nazis view each other?

Some hate each other and kill each other in Donbas. Other Russian neo-Nazis hate Putin more than they do the Ukrainians, and fight on Ukraine’s side.

Here’s a pro-Russian neo-Nazi psychopath who led the Rusich group, which came to Ukraine in order to kill Ukrainians:

(warning – there is a graphic picture in there of him beheading a puppy):

The point about "Banderist" versus "Stalinist" government is well taken. However, I myself am not making either claim. I simply want to point out that there are legitimate concerns about the influence of the far right in Ukrainian politics. Clearly you know more about this than I do and I defer to you on its extent.

I don’t have a dog in this fight, but it seems to me that there is no shortage of right-wing radicals at the second tier of the Ukrainian government, and that the top tier has to give them some of what they want.

You are correct. But having some right-wing nationalists in the second tier (it is still not dominated by them) and giving them some of what they want is not does not equal a "Banderist government." The Communist Party, who venerate Stalin, were Yanukovich's coalition partners in the parliament (though they were only given one ministerial post during his rule), yet it is not referred to as the "Stalinist government."

Andriy Parubiy, for example, was founder with Oleh Tyahnybok of the Social-National Party of Ukraine before trying to put on a more mainstream face.

This shift from right-wing extremism to respectable far right is comparable to the mainstreaming of France's National Front or Austria's Freedom Party. Before the former parties decided that Russia was a much more useful ally, they had friendly relations with Ukraine's Svoboda party, btw.

His current party affiliation is People’s Front (president: Yatsenyuk), which has a military council representing all of the major right-wing militias (Azov, Aidar, and so on). In 2014, People’s Front won 82 seats in parliament,

Although Parubiy joined Yatseniuk's party, it is not his party but follows its own program. The People's Front is not a far right party. It's like if Le Pen joined the French Conservatives and as a Conservative was given an important post.

An aside: there is no shortage of neo-Nazis in Russia (though fortunately not in the government). How do Ukrainian and Russian neo-Nazis view each other?

Some hate each other and kill each other in Donbas. Other Russian neo-Nazis hate Putin more than they do the Ukrainians, and fight on Ukraine's side.

Here's a pro-Russian neo-Nazi psychopath who led the Rusich group, which came to Ukraine in order to kill Ukrainians:

(warning - there is a graphic picture in there of him beheading a puppy):

The point about “Banderist” versus “Stalinist” government is well taken. However, I myself am not making either claim. I simply want to point out that there are legitimate concerns about the influence of the far right in Ukrainian politics. Clearly you know more about this than I do and I defer to you on its extent.

Your concerns about right wing politics within Ukraine are legitimate as long as you don't refer toUkraine itself, or to its political establishment as being a:

rump Banderite entity

The Ukrainian right wing spectrum is varied as in most any European countries, as AP has pointed out. Mr. Keverich doesn't seem to be able to discuss things Ukrainian without digressing to using stereotypical memes that really make no sense after just a little bit of inquiry. In this instance, he seems to be referring to all of Ukraine as a 'rump Baanderite entity'.

I simply want to point out that there are legitimate concerns about the influence of the far right in Ukrainian politics.

Correct. This neo-Nazi, for example, was placed in charge of the police in Kiev oblast (province):

http://khpg.org/en/index.php?id=1415367345

OTOH, the Communist Party in Russia, which defends Stalin, is more important and influential in that country. That is hardly better.

If you have time and are interested, this is probably the best article describing the relationship between the far right and the political powers in Ukraine. Article is from December 2014 but it's still rather relevant:

According to this ranking, Romania is much less corrupt than is Germany.

Germany is fantastically corrupt, to the core. If you doubt this, just look up on your favorite search engine some of the well known scandals surrounding, inter alia, VW, Siemens, Deutsche Bank, and Daimler. The question above as to why is a good one.

The point about "Banderist" versus "Stalinist" government is well taken. However, I myself am not making either claim. I simply want to point out that there are legitimate concerns about the influence of the far right in Ukrainian politics. Clearly you know more about this than I do and I defer to you on its extent.

Your concerns about right wing politics within Ukraine are legitimate as long as you don’t refer toUkraine itself, or to its political establishment as being a:

rump Banderite entity

The Ukrainian right wing spectrum is varied as in most any European countries, as AP has pointed out. Mr. Keverich doesn’t seem to be able to discuss things Ukrainian without digressing to using stereotypical memes that really make no sense after just a little bit of inquiry. In this instance, he seems to be referring to all of Ukraine as a ‘rump Baanderite entity’.

So for you, 5,000 dead civilians, billions in damage, 1 million plus displaced people (the price paid by the Donbas people for the Russian adventurism) is "worth it" so that local and foreign Russian "Rambos" supported by the Russian government can do their thing, and so that the Ukrainian state has a damaged military (and economic) capacity. Your humanitarianism towards people you consider to be "Novorussians" is awe-inspiring.

You’ve got it backwards: the real issue is Ukrainian regime, that’s hostile to Russia and Russians. It must be declawed so that it’s no longer in the position to hurt the Russian people.

The reason why there are refugees from Donbass is because major cities are close to the frontline, and being subjected to daily Ukrainian shelling. In other words the solution to the problem of Ukraine is more intervention, not less intervention.

You’ve got it backwards: the real issue is Ukrainian regime, that’s hostile to Russia and Russians.

Because it is the Ukrainian regime that is sending weapons and fighters into Russia. Got that. That's why it is necessary to send volunteers and a flood of weapons into Ukraine.

The reason why there are refugees from Donbass is because major cities are close to the frontline, and being subjected to daily Ukrainian shelling. In other words the solution to the problem of Ukraine is more intervention, not less intervention.

By spreading the war to Kharkiv and its millions of people. Great. All to prevent the Ukrainian assault on Russia.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

When a person believes and behaves like that towards other people, he is often involunrarily committed. But different rules apply towards nations, particularly powerful ones.

Germany is fantastically corrupt, to the core. If you doubt this, just look up on your favorite search engine some of the well known scandals surrounding, inter alia, VW, Siemens, Deutsche Bank, and Daimler. The question above as to why is a good one.

Germany is fantastically corrupt, to the core.

Sure, but a lot more corrupt than Romania? Has anyone here had experience with both the Balkans and Germany? Perhaps I’m wrong, but I find it very hard to believe that Germany is a lot worse.

I’ve lived briefly in Germany but have not visited the Balkans. Germany struck me as a very law and order type of place.

You've got it backwards: the real issue is Ukrainian regime, that's hostile to Russia and Russians. It must be declawed so that it's no longer in the position to hurt the Russian people.

The reason why there are refugees from Donbass is because major cities are close to the frontline, and being subjected to daily Ukrainian shelling. In other words the solution to the problem of Ukraine is more intervention, not less intervention.

You’ve got it backwards: the real issue is Ukrainian regime, that’s hostile to Russia and Russians.

Because it is the Ukrainian regime that is sending weapons and fighters into Russia. Got that. That’s why it is necessary to send volunteers and a flood of weapons into Ukraine.

The reason why there are refugees from Donbass is because major cities are close to the frontline, and being subjected to daily Ukrainian shelling. In other words the solution to the problem of Ukraine is more intervention, not less intervention.

By spreading the war to Kharkiv and its millions of people. Great. All to prevent the Ukrainian assault on Russia.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

When a person believes and behaves like that towards other people, he is often involunrarily committed. But different rules apply towards nations, particularly powerful ones.

You’ve got it backwards: the real issue is Ukrainian regime, that’s hostile to Russia and Russians.

Because it is the Ukrainian regime that is sending weapons and fighters into Russia. Got that. That's why it is necessary to send volunteers and a flood of weapons into Ukraine.

The reason why there are refugees from Donbass is because major cities are close to the frontline, and being subjected to daily Ukrainian shelling. In other words the solution to the problem of Ukraine is more intervention, not less intervention.

By spreading the war to Kharkiv and its millions of people. Great. All to prevent the Ukrainian assault on Russia.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

When a person believes and behaves like that towards other people, he is often involunrarily committed. But different rules apply towards nations, particularly powerful ones.

When a person believes and behaves like that towards other people, he is often involunrarily committed.

And is there any doubt whether or not Keverich and his ideas merit a trip to the funny farm?

In other words the solution to the problem of Ukraine is more intervention, not less intervention.

The point about "Banderist" versus "Stalinist" government is well taken. However, I myself am not making either claim. I simply want to point out that there are legitimate concerns about the influence of the far right in Ukrainian politics. Clearly you know more about this than I do and I defer to you on its extent.

I simply want to point out that there are legitimate concerns about the influence of the far right in Ukrainian politics.

Correct. This neo-Nazi, for example, was placed in charge of the police in Kiev oblast (province):

OTOH, the Communist Party in Russia, which defends Stalin, is more important and influential in that country. That is hardly better.

If you have time and are interested, this is probably the best article describing the relationship between the far right and the political powers in Ukraine. Article is from December 2014 but it’s still rather relevant:

I poked around the rest of Shekhovtsov's blog, though, and I found him to be intemperate. Putin as the new Hitler. Dugin as someone to be taken seriously. And so on. He might even sometimes be making valid points, but his foot is so heavy on the distortion pedal it is hard to hear. For people that actually care about resolving conflicts and hope for a better future, this is counter-productive.

Looking at their website, the KPRF seems to consist mostly of dinosaurs, so one hopes they are going extinct. I've heard that it is mostly elderly people voting for them, but I don't know. Anyway, as far as I know they don't have militias. Just kids marching around in red scarves.
I hope I am not being naive.

Since I have to live with it, I am more concerned about the possibility of a creeping influence of the far right in Russian politics, over the course of the next twenty years, which is one reason I am interested in this question for Ukraine.

I simply want to point out that there are legitimate concerns about the influence of the far right in Ukrainian politics.

Correct. This neo-Nazi, for example, was placed in charge of the police in Kiev oblast (province):

http://khpg.org/en/index.php?id=1415367345

OTOH, the Communist Party in Russia, which defends Stalin, is more important and influential in that country. That is hardly better.

If you have time and are interested, this is probably the best article describing the relationship between the far right and the political powers in Ukraine. Article is from December 2014 but it's still rather relevant:

I poked around the rest of Shekhovtsov’s blog, though, and I found him to be intemperate. Putin as the new Hitler. Dugin as someone to be taken seriously. And so on. He might even sometimes be making valid points, but his foot is so heavy on the distortion pedal it is hard to hear. For people that actually care about resolving conflicts and hope for a better future, this is counter-productive.

Looking at their website, the KPRF seems to consist mostly of dinosaurs, so one hopes they are going extinct. I’ve heard that it is mostly elderly people voting for them, but I don’t know. Anyway, as far as I know they don’t have militias. Just kids marching around in red scarves.
I hope I am not being naive.

Since I have to live with it, I am more concerned about the possibility of a creeping influence of the far right in Russian politics, over the course of the next twenty years, which is one reason I am interested in this question for Ukraine.

I poked around the rest of Shekhovtsov's blog, though, and I found him to be intemperate. Putin as the new Hitler. Dugin as someone to be taken seriously. And so on. He might even sometimes be making valid points, but his foot is so heavy on the distortion pedal it is hard to hear. For people that actually care about resolving conflicts and hope for a better future, this is counter-productive.

Looking at their website, the KPRF seems to consist mostly of dinosaurs, so one hopes they are going extinct. I've heard that it is mostly elderly people voting for them, but I don't know. Anyway, as far as I know they don't have militias. Just kids marching around in red scarves.
I hope I am not being naive.

Since I have to live with it, I am more concerned about the possibility of a creeping influence of the far right in Russian politics, over the course of the next twenty years, which is one reason I am interested in this question for Ukraine.

I poked around the rest of Shekhovtsov’s blog, though, and I found him to be intemperate. Putin as the new Hitler. Dugin as someone to be taken seriously

Yeah I agree, I would take that with a grain of salt, and stick to concrete facts, such as relationships between political groups and people – those are useful.

The Hajnal line being applied to Russia was always a shaky idea. The Russian Orthodox Church forbade marriages between first cousins (and continues to) unless a special dispensation was given, which would put it in line with much of Central and Western Europe. I have researched the issue to some extant in a number of books and studies, and never found any indication that Russian villagers during the pre-Soviet period practiced cousin marriage in any appreciable numbers. Since under serfdom the peasants needed both the local priest and the estate landowner to sign off to any pairing, much attention was paid to keep the rotation of marriages somewhat "fresh" up to and including bringing in new serfs from other villages and regions to mate with the established populations.

Then take into account that Russia's frontiers were often expanded by runaway peasants from the internal regions taking off for then marginal lands and intermixing with each other and local ethnic groups, and the whole idea that these people have a similar profile to Sicilian mafia clans is rather dubious. I think the assumption is the product of general ignorance of Russian history and traditions by Western sociologists.

Which does bring up the question of why Eastern Slavs tend to be so casually and at times shamelessly corrupt and nepotistic even if they are not clannish in the way that many Middle Eastern and South Asian nations are. A new and coherent theory that does not fall back on the tired old stereotypes might be useful for actually conceptualizing and combating the problem.

Netherlands is 23 and Oman is 19, Romania is 31 and France is 28, Poland is 38 and Belgium is 36.

The "Hajnal line theory that explains everything" spectacularly failed.

The Hajnal line being applied to Russia was always a shaky idea. The Russian Orthodox Church forbade marriages between first cousins (and continues to) unless a special dispensation was given, which would put it in line with much of Central and Western Europe. I have researched the issue to some extant in a number of books and studies, and never found any indication that Russian villagers during the pre-Soviet period practiced cousin marriage in any appreciable numbers. Since under serfdom the peasants needed both the local priest and the estate landowner to sign off to any pairing, much attention was paid to keep the rotation of marriages somewhat “fresh” up to and including bringing in new serfs from other villages and regions to mate with the established populations.

Then take into account that Russia’s frontiers were often expanded by runaway peasants from the internal regions taking off for then marginal lands and intermixing with each other and local ethnic groups, and the whole idea that these people have a similar profile to Sicilian mafia clans is rather dubious. I think the assumption is the product of general ignorance of Russian history and traditions by Western sociologists.

Which does bring up the question of why Eastern Slavs tend to be so casually and at times shamelessly corrupt and nepotistic even if they are not clannish in the way that many Middle Eastern and South Asian nations are. A new and coherent theory that does not fall back on the tired old stereotypes might be useful for actually conceptualizing and combating the problem.

The problem is the Hajnal line has nothing to do with inbreeding and cousin marriages. Those internet science freaks, who try to appeal to Hajnal as an ultimate fundamental authority in their shaky pseudo-scientific theories, even fail to understand what Hajnal discovered and wanted to say.

With only 41 countries represented on the list, this is an incomplete survey. Besides, it relies on survey respondents’ views about corruption in their own countries, which may be limited by their limited personal experiences relative to the outside world and the domestic media’s adherence to government narratives. Transparency International’s methodology asks respondents about their experiences in other countries, and that is clearly more telling. That survey puts Russia and Ukraine in the 75th percentile of most corrupt countries in the world, with Russia and Ukraine both ranked at 131.

it relies on survey respondents’ views about corruption in their own countries, which may be limited by their limited personal experiences relative to the outside world and the domestic media’s adherence to government narratives.

Good point. This article claims that Ukraine is both the most transparent and most corrupt place in Europe:

The combination of fairly free media, e-declarations in which civil servants' salaries can be openly compared to civil servants' assets, and ongoing mass corruption means that Ukrainians know far more about corruption in their country than most other people do. Such a situation basically guarantees that Ukraine would do very poorly on this type of survey.

The Hajnal line being applied to Russia was always a shaky idea. The Russian Orthodox Church forbade marriages between first cousins (and continues to) unless a special dispensation was given, which would put it in line with much of Central and Western Europe. I have researched the issue to some extant in a number of books and studies, and never found any indication that Russian villagers during the pre-Soviet period practiced cousin marriage in any appreciable numbers. Since under serfdom the peasants needed both the local priest and the estate landowner to sign off to any pairing, much attention was paid to keep the rotation of marriages somewhat "fresh" up to and including bringing in new serfs from other villages and regions to mate with the established populations.

Then take into account that Russia's frontiers were often expanded by runaway peasants from the internal regions taking off for then marginal lands and intermixing with each other and local ethnic groups, and the whole idea that these people have a similar profile to Sicilian mafia clans is rather dubious. I think the assumption is the product of general ignorance of Russian history and traditions by Western sociologists.

Which does bring up the question of why Eastern Slavs tend to be so casually and at times shamelessly corrupt and nepotistic even if they are not clannish in the way that many Middle Eastern and South Asian nations are. A new and coherent theory that does not fall back on the tired old stereotypes might be useful for actually conceptualizing and combating the problem.

All peoples are nepotistic including the “altruistic” North Europeans.

With only 41 countries represented on the list, this is an incomplete survey. Besides, it relies on survey respondents' views about corruption in their own countries, which may be limited by their limited personal experiences relative to the outside world and the domestic media's adherence to government narratives. Transparency International's methodology asks respondents about their experiences in other countries, and that is clearly more telling. That survey puts Russia and Ukraine in the 75th percentile of most corrupt countries in the world, with Russia and Ukraine both ranked at 131.

it relies on survey respondents’ views about corruption in their own countries, which may be limited by their limited personal experiences relative to the outside world and the domestic media’s adherence to government narratives.

Good point. This article claims that Ukraine is both the most transparent and most corrupt place in Europe:

The combination of fairly free media, e-declarations in which civil servants’ salaries can be openly compared to civil servants’ assets, and ongoing mass corruption means that Ukrainians know far more about corruption in their country than most other people do. Such a situation basically guarantees that Ukraine would do very poorly on this type of survey.

which civil servants’ salaries can be openly compared to civil servants’ assets, and ongoing mass corruption means that Ukrainians know far more about corruption in their country than most other people do

hahahahah! They have only (badly) copied the same moves that Russia have done before the coup you dumbfuck....it's nothing more than window dressing thogh because most of the money is unaccounted for and the oligarchs have more control, over a smaller pie , in Ukraine than they have done before you idiot

'fairly free media'- the most unfree media, subject to oligarchic interests, anywhere else in the world you dipshit.....Where mass crimes in Odessa,Kiev,killing politicians,journalists,most of the big oligarchic crimes are camofaluged or underreported.....
a media that barely has any pro-russia voices on it's tv shows, whilst russian television has Ukronazi dipshits on everyday you dumb prick

it relies on survey respondents’ views about corruption in their own countries, which may be limited by their limited personal experiences relative to the outside world and the domestic media’s adherence to government narratives.

Good point. This article claims that Ukraine is both the most transparent and most corrupt place in Europe:

The combination of fairly free media, e-declarations in which civil servants' salaries can be openly compared to civil servants' assets, and ongoing mass corruption means that Ukrainians know far more about corruption in their country than most other people do. Such a situation basically guarantees that Ukraine would do very poorly on this type of survey.

which civil servants’ salaries can be openly compared to civil servants’ assets, and ongoing mass corruption means that Ukrainians know far more about corruption in their country than most other people do

hahahahah! They have only (badly) copied the same moves that Russia have done before the coup you dumbfuck….it’s nothing more than window dressing thogh because most of the money is unaccounted for and the oligarchs have more control, over a smaller pie , in Ukraine than they have done before you idiot

‘fairly free media’- the most unfree media, subject to oligarchic interests, anywhere else in the world you dipshit…..Where mass crimes in Odessa,Kiev,killing politicians,journalists,most of the big oligarchic crimes are camofaluged or underreported…..
a media that barely has any pro-russia voices on it’s tv shows, whilst russian television has Ukronazi dipshits on everyday you dumb prick

The Hajnal line being applied to Russia was always a shaky idea. The Russian Orthodox Church forbade marriages between first cousins (and continues to) unless a special dispensation was given, which would put it in line with much of Central and Western Europe. I have researched the issue to some extant in a number of books and studies, and never found any indication that Russian villagers during the pre-Soviet period practiced cousin marriage in any appreciable numbers. Since under serfdom the peasants needed both the local priest and the estate landowner to sign off to any pairing, much attention was paid to keep the rotation of marriages somewhat "fresh" up to and including bringing in new serfs from other villages and regions to mate with the established populations.

Then take into account that Russia's frontiers were often expanded by runaway peasants from the internal regions taking off for then marginal lands and intermixing with each other and local ethnic groups, and the whole idea that these people have a similar profile to Sicilian mafia clans is rather dubious. I think the assumption is the product of general ignorance of Russian history and traditions by Western sociologists.

Which does bring up the question of why Eastern Slavs tend to be so casually and at times shamelessly corrupt and nepotistic even if they are not clannish in the way that many Middle Eastern and South Asian nations are. A new and coherent theory that does not fall back on the tired old stereotypes might be useful for actually conceptualizing and combating the problem.

The problem is the Hajnal line has nothing to do with inbreeding and cousin marriages. Those internet science freaks, who try to appeal to Hajnal as an ultimate fundamental authority in their shaky pseudo-scientific theories, even fail to understand what Hajnal discovered and wanted to say.

Blogroll

This is not so much meant to be comprehensive as to illustrate the themes and individual thinkers whom I follow and am inspired by.

I do not bother including any MSM outlets, since I’m sure they can do just fine without my publicity.

Blogs which I consider to be particularly good and/or prominent are highlighted in bold, and blogs that appear to have gone dormant appear at the end in italics. While I try to keep these things objective, if you include me in your blogroll that does vastly increase the chances that I’ll reciprocate.